台灣螺絲扣件產業成功關鍵因素之探討dba.kuas.edu.tw/files/archive/163_bc8f2f6f.pdf ·...

1057

A Study of the Key Success Factor for Taiwan Fasteners Industry

hcyeh@cc.kuas.edu.tw

harry@aimreachfasteners.com

TS16949

(AHP)

2003 6

2004 44 2004 1.69 /

1.01 /

2003200624

4521-1

(1/kg)

1058

TS16949

(1)

(2)

(Analytical Hierarchy

ProcessAHP)

(3)

1.

80%

1059

()88

1999623

FQA(Fastener Quality Act)

WTO

16002

110018000()

()38%27%

(industrial cluster)

2078%400

400095%

3

2.

2010580

20091,379

1.

(key success factorsKSF) Daniel 1961 Management Information

Crisis

( 2-1)

2.

Ferguson and Dickson

(1)

(2)

(3)(4)

(5)

1060

KSF

3.

Hofer and Schendle Strategy Formulation and Analytic Concepts

(1)(2)(3)

(4)(5)

Leidecker and Bruno (1)

(2)

Porter

(3)-

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)-

(AHP)

(AHP) 5 7

- =0.75 () 0.75

(1989)

1. QS9000

QS-9000 1994 8 GM Ford Chrysler

ISO9000 ISO

90011994 ++PPAP

QS9000

2006 12 TS16949

2. ISO/TS16949

TS Technical SpecificationISO/TS 16949 ISO

/ 1999 3

1061

1 2002 3 1 ISO/TS 16949

(IATFInternational Automotive Task Force) AIAG

() VDA/QMC () SMMT () ANFIA () CCFA/FIEV ()

ISO/TS 16949 ISO/TS 16949 QS 9000 (

)VDA 6.1()( EAQF 94() AVSQ 94 ())

ISO/TS 16949

3. ()

() CNS ()()CNS

CNS

() CNS ()CNS mark

()

()(TAF)

() TAF ()

TAF IAF MLA

TAF (Conformity Assessment Procedure) ISO Guide 67

()/CE () SAE. ASTM, ASME, IFI, ISO, EN, DIN, BS

/(//()

) ISO Guide 65

(WTO TBT)

()

(Analytic Hierarchy ProcessAHP) Thomas L.Saaty 1971

(Nominal Scale)(Pairwise Comparison)

(Comparison Matrix)(Eigenvector)-

(Eigenvalue)

AHP

AHP

(1).

(2).

(3).

1062

(4).

(5).(pairwise comparison)(positive reciprocal matrix)

(6).(A BB C A C)(A B B

C A C )

(7).(consistency)

(8).(weighting principal)

(9).

AHP 1357

9 2468 1

1 AHP

1 (equal importance)

3 (weak importance)

5 (essential importance)

7 (very strong importance)

9 (absolute importance)

2468 (intermediate importance)

AHP

n

n(n-1)/2 n/7

(1)(pairwise comparison matrix)

1/9

1/8 1/212389 n

1

(2)

Saaty

(consistency index) 0.1 ( C.R

1063

KSF

KSF

AHP

KSF

KSF

1

()

;

1.

(1):

(2)

(3)

2.

(primary data (secondary

data), :

(Stewart, 1984Kiecolt and Nathan1988; 2000

(1)

(2)

1064

(3)

(4)

(5)

3.

(1)

?

(2)~

(3)

1.

2.

3.

4.:

(4) ( missing data) ,

( )

1065

1.

Porter1980

13

2

2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 /

10

11

12

13

2.

15 3

3.

Strategy Strategies

Porter(1980) Competitive Strategy

( 4)

14 5

1066

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

4 Porter

1.

2.

3.

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1067

AHP

(1)

(2)

/()

(AD)

AD/(R)AHP

10 10100 %

6

6

()

()

()

()

1 4 3 2 0 (3)

(AHP)

1989 7 AHP 5

7 AHP

-

0.75()(0.75)() 0.75

(1989)

0.75

0.75

4-1

0.75

0.75

0.75

1068

AHP

2 AHP

Thomas L.Saaty(1980)

(1)(3)(5)(7)

(9)(2)(4)(6)(8)

302583%

AHP

7

2

1069

7

0.25 0.0475 11

0.12 0.0228 14

0.35 0.0665 8

0.04 0.0076 16

0.09 0.0171 15

0.16 0.0304 13

0.17 0.0493 10

0.22 0.0638 9

0.15 0.0435 12

0.23 0.0667 7

0.24 0.0696 6

0.22 0.1122 3

0.23 0.1173 2

0.14 0.0714 4

0.27 0.1377 1

0.14 0.0714 4

(AHP)

ISO/TS 16949 ISO/TS 16949

ISO/TS 16949

ISO/TS 16949 PPAP

1070

4-6

[1] 2010 2011 10

[2] (AHP)() 27(6) 1-20

1989

[3] (AHP)() 27(7) 5-22

1989

[4] KSF

2003

[5] 2000

[6] S

(EMBA)2005

[7] 2001

[8] 2000

[9] 2010

[10] ()

[11]

[12] 10

[13] (NFDA) 126

[14]

2008

[15] David W. StewartMichael A. Kamins2000

[1] Saaty,T.L.,The analytic hierarchy processMcGraw-Hill, New York1980

1071

[1] http://www.google.com.tw/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail2.tmue.

edu.tw%2F~g961209%2F961126.doc&ei=fH3iTeujHIeivgO93piEBw&usg=AFQjCNERNHkuNSsoZX6wVXqH

HXqBqfbrnw

[2] http://www.google.com.tw/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDsQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.ydu.edu.

tw%2F~deniel%2F981RS%2Fch14.ppt&ei=fH3iTeujHIeivgO93piEBw&usg=AFQjCNFkN3MEh4GNN667sLx

NbYctx3Twqw